Discussion in 'News Zone' started by WoodysGirl, Mar 24, 2014.
Why does he have to take a pay cut on a contract that was agreed to by both parties?
When you are released you get nothing, that's why the contract is not guaranteed.
No, the precedent is not allowing players to be "injured" as a hold out tactic.
This is past tense, some are getting emotionally involved in this Ratliff situation, my responses have been basically "does making Ratliff pay help us going forward (cap wise) if not then I'm not interested". If it's just a squabble between a billionaire and a millionaire then I'm just not interested because I ain't getting none.
Some old info to provide a little flavor for how it was--
Source: Cowboys DT Jay Ratliff won’t practice in Oxnard but on target for season opener
By David Moore/ Reporter
9:42 pm on August 7, 2013 |
Jay Ratliff will not practice while the team is in California, a source said, but there is no concern about his availability for the start of the season.
The Cowboys defensive tackle strained his hamstring during conditioning tests on the first day of training camp and was placed on the team’s physically unable to perform list. Club officials are pleased with his progress but want to remain cautious at this stage of camp.
The team plays in Oakland Friday and won’t return to the practice fields in Oxnard until Sunday. Five more practices are scheduled in Southern California before the team breaks camp on Aug. 16.
There’s a chance Ratliff will work back into practice before the team faces Cincinnati in the Cowboys first pre-season home game on Aug. 24.
“I think he’s fine,’’ executive vice president Stephen Jones said. “He’s right on. We don’t have any concerns right now with Jay.
“I think he’s moving in a good direction as far as we’re concerned.’’
Jerry Jones: Not concerned about Jay Ratliff missing camp or preseason, wants him ready for full season
When defensive tackle Jay Ratliff was placed on the physically unable to perform list at the start of training camp because of a hamstring injury suffered during the pre-camp conditioning test, it was supposed to be a short time thing.
Roughly four weeks later, Ratliff has yet to return to the practice field and there is no timetable on when he will start practicing. He will miss all of training camp in Oxnard as the Cowboys will leave there before Saturday's third preseason game against the Arizona Cardinals.
At this point it''s not known when or if Ratliff will play at all in the preseason.
However, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones remains unconcerned and doesn't care at all if he takes a preseason snap. He says the Cowboys have a good handle on Ratliff's injury and he just wants him ready to go play a full season when they begin the regular season Sept. 8 against the Giants.
"I’m interested in him being in shape," Jones said. "I’m interested in him having the best chance to play as much as he can during the season. I don’t have any desire to see him make a lot of plays in preseason. I know what he can do.
"So our goal should be – and I know it’s his – to get him out there so he’s lined up against the Giants and will stay on the field all the way through the season, relative to any injuries or anything like that.
"It’s unique, because we know what he is and we see what he is physically right now. He’s very capable of playing at the level that he’s always played at. We’ve just got to not get in a hurry there."
Ratliff missed 10 games last season because of foot and hernia injuries. He has seen his production drop in each of the last four seasons.
Yet, Jones said is he very confident Ratliff can still play at a Pro Bowl level when healthy and there will be no drop off.
"The nature of him, his play, type player he is, his makeup," Jones said. "We call it makeup, his energy level, how he approaches the game. His style of play will allow him, if he’s healthy, to be what he is. And he should be, from the standpoint of his physical health, he should be in the prime of his career. In the prime of his career.
"Arguably, when a guy is 30 years old, he’s at his strongest. Thirty-one years old, he can be at his strongest. There’s no reason in the world we handicap 31 and 32 because we’re looking at how much is left past that.
"As far as looking at the physical attributes of the player, he can be every bit of the player strength-wise or effectiveness in his thirties as he was at 28 or 29.
"I’m not concerned. If we can get him to where the soft-tissue things are comfortable for him, I’m not concerned about him playing at the level that we’d expect to open the season. I don’t want to push anything over a preseason game with him."
From the summer:
Calvin Watkins @calvinwatkins 6m
Jay Ratliff just spoke and hinted he's got issues with the strength and conditioning staff. "Everybody involved knows the answer."
Ratliff said its not his hamstring and there's a reason why he didn't come to offseason rehab.
Tom Orsborn @tom_orsborn 4m
Ratliff says it was more than hamstring that kept him out, makes cryptic comment when asked why he didn't workout w/tm.after hernia surgery.
Ratliff on PUP and groin factor in decision: "Everyone knew what was going on beforehand."
But if he indeed had "two muscles ripped from the bone" like his agent said, he wouldn't have been cleared to workout... either after being released or far earlier, at the beginning of training camp when he had his physical and took the conditioning run. And again, he passed the physical at the beginning of training camp and didn't beg-off the conditioning run with a "Hey chaps, there are two muscles ripped from the bone in my pelvic area... I can't do this."
True but I don't believe the burden of proof, even to a mediator, is that absolute. If anyone knows what the burden is could they contribute to the discussion? I understand that it isn't an actual civil court but I believe that our burden is to prove to the mediator(peer) that it is reasonable to assume that Ratliff defrauded the Cowboys. Mr. W. gave the timeline earlier. I didn't realize the timeline was so close. To me this is a cut and dry case.
Due to HIPPA laws we couldn't go after his records "without his consent". It seems to me that if our medical staff had somehow "missed" how extensive his injury was, he would have allowed sharing of information so that we could all get on the same page. I don't know for sure whether he did or not but it would seem to me that he didn't because we released him and I don't think Jerry would have done that if there was evidence that we screwed up, especially considering he didn't give him a medical settlement. That tells me the rat didn't provide said evidence which is still his onus.
I think it helps, going forward, team attitude-wise. Alot of complaint on this board is about players not playing once they get their contract or suddenly being hurt all the time after they get paid. This will tell them that owners, in general, and Jerry, specifically, will not continue to take this without a fight. Win or lose it will make players at least think before they fake injuries.
The Dallas Morning News reports that the Cowboys want a portion of Ratliff’s $10 million signing bonus, a portion of his 2013 base salary and the money Ratliff used to purchase a suite at AT&T Stadium.
Since this could have been done months ago, it appears that the timing of this coincides with the owners meeting. All speculation on my part but maybe JJ wanted the other owners take on this, and the answer led him to file the complaint.
It honestly should be the reply everyone uses haha.. especially after that robbery Ratliff committed.
But I didn't know what speedkillz said, that he failed it because he didn't show up or whatever. Speed knows his stuff, though -- I know he keeps up with everything more closely than just about anyone.
I am sure that the wording of the contract states that in consideration for the money being given that the player has to meet some sort of performance standard. The club felt Ratliff wasn't meeting that and exercised their option to void the contract. They did nothing illegal or fraudulent in that regard.
I don't know if Dallas will win this, but I think as an organization they have to try.
What is sad is that I am pretty sure in both cases Dallas went to Ratliff before they had to in each case to give him new deals.
That's the precedent we don't want being set. The precedent the others were talking about was about cap credits. Two different things.
Yes, I understand that. But I can assure you there won't be a precedent set in that regard. It would amount to essentially the antithesis of collusion. Additionally it's money paid and reported, particularly for tax purposes. The salary cap is lawful price-fixing practice certified under the CBA.
This grievance basically isn't necessarily about the money, but protecting the integrity of the NFL's financial operations. The Dallas Cowboys are not the only organization hoping to win this case - 31 other teams want to see Ratliff lose this one for the reasons stated in the article -- eliminating the ability to set a precedent that false injury can be used as a holdout tactic to a) get paid and b) play somewhere else.
tl;dr -- in its most basic form Ratliff kind of committed larceny by false pretenses. This case seeks to ensure that doesn't become a regularly accepted practice in the weird world of quasi-law involving sports and collective bargaining agreements.
No, the precedent in regard to money going back to the cap has already been set. That's what was being argued.
The precedent that would be set by this case is the one concerning a player faking injury to avoid contractual obligations.
Sounds like you love life.